Pro-Life Victory for Pharmacists

On Friday, September 21, 2012, the Illinois Court of Appeals upheld a trial court’s injunction against the State of Illinois that protects the right of pro-life pharmacy owners to refuse to stock and sell the morning-after pill and similar drugs that interfere with the development of human life at its earliest stages. In Morr-Fitz, Inc. et al., v. Pat Quinn, Governor, et al., the court held that the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act “protects plaintiffs’ decisions not to dispense emergency contraceptives due to their conscience beliefs.”

The plaintiffs, Luke Vander Bleek and Glenn Kosirog, owners of three pharmacies between them, have been fighting a state mandate that they stock and sell the “morning-after pill” since 2005. The ACLJ is co-counsel for the pharmacies and their owners, along with Mark Rienzi, Esq. of the Becket Fund.

In April, 2005, then Governor Rod Blagojevich issued an “Emergency Rule” mandating that pharmacies fill prescriptions for drugs, including emergency contraception, “without delay.” The Emergency Rule became a final administrative rule later that year. After the Rule was finalized, Kosirog and Vander Bleek sued the governor and other state officials claiming that the regulation violated their rights under the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause, the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and the state’s Health Care Right of Conscience Act, one of the country’s most comprehensive set of protections for the rights of conscience in the health care arena.

After going to the Illinois Supreme Court, which ruled in 2008 that Kosirog and Vander Bleek had standing to challenge the rule, the case went back to the trial court which, in March of 2011, entered an injunction blocking enforcement of Blagojevich’s Rule. Today, the Illinois Supreme Court upheld the permanent injunction as to Kosirog and Vander Bleek, allowing them the freedom not to comply with the Rule.

In arriving at its decision, the court relied in part on a case brought by the ACLJ in 2006, Vandersand v. Wal-Mart Stores. In that case, a federal court ruled that a pharmacist who refused to dispense emergency contraception because of his religious and conscientious beliefs fell under the protection of the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act. Both these cases are part of a long line of litigation that the ACLJ has brought on behalf of pro-life health care professionals over the past decade and a half in both federal and state courts. The ACLJ seeks to defend such professionals who are on the front lines of the pro-life battle. While most of us enjoy the freedom to profess pro-life views without much fear of an immediate personal toll, when doctors, nurses, pharmacists and other health care workers take a pro-life stand, it can cost them their jobs and livelihoods.

With a permanent injunction in place, Kosirog and Vander Bleek have the legal right to run their pharmacies according to the dictates of their conscience without interference from state officials. Considering the ongoing, nationwide litigation pending against the HHS Mandate, today’s decision is a welcome one indeed. While the decision turned on the application of state only, it shows that courts will protect the rights of conscience when the legal authority is clear. We are confident that the federal courts will do the same against the HHS Mandate.

Good fences may make good neighbors, but in countries like Pakistan where religious tensions are high, even a simple dispute can become an excuse for violence. Our international affiliate, the European Centre for Law and Justice’s (ECLJ) office in Pakistan, the Organization for Legal Aid (OLA),

The long-simmering battle between the federal government and the state of California’s lawless agenda has erupted as part of escalating conflict last week after the Justice Department filed a lawsuit seeking to strike down the state’s attempt to usurp federal authority and write its own immigration...

In January 2017, China’s new Administrative Law on Activities of Overseas Non-Governmental Organizations (“ONGOs”) went into effect, and it is impacting hundreds of international Christian groups that are sharing the gospel to the 1.6 billion people in China through medical, developmental, or...

The American Center for Law & Justice (ACLJ) has filed another brief with the Supreme Court of the United States asking the Court to review the case involving the undercover investigation of the abortion industry conducted by the Center for Medical Progress (CMP). The brief supports the petition...

The ACLJ filed a friend-of-the-court brief today in the Supreme Court in an important free speech case from California. The case is First Resort, Inc. v. Herrera . At stake are the free speech rights of pro-life pregnancy centers and, indeed, countless charitable agencies. Here's the background:

The Supreme Court of the United States has long recognized that the right to use public sidewalks “for purposes of assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens, and discussing public questions . . . has, from ancient times, been a part of the privileges, immunities, rights, and liberties of...

Just over a week ago, we celebrated the fact that Lucas Warren—an 18-month-old who has Down syndrome—was selected as Gerber’s Spokesbaby for 2018. Lucas’ dad, Jason Warren, stated : “We’re hoping this will impact everyone — that it will shed a little bit of light on the special needs community and...

The ACLJ is an organization dedicated to the defense of constitutional liberties secured by law.

American Center for Law and Justice is a d/b/a for Christian Advocates Serving Evangelism,
Inc., a tax-exempt, not-for-profit, religious corporation as defined under Section 501(c)(3)
of the Internal Revenue Code, specifically dedicated to the ideal that religious freedom and
freedom of speech are inalienable, God-given rights. The Center's purpose is to engage legal,
legislative and cultural issues by implementing an effective strategy of advocacy, education
and litigation to ensure that those rights are protected under the law. The organization has
participated in numerous cases before the Supreme Court, Federal Court of Appeals, Federal
District Courts, and various state courts regarding freedom of religion and freedom of speech.
Your gift is very much appreciated and fully deductible as a charitable contribution. A copy
of our latest financial report may be obtained by writing to us at P.O. Box 90555, Washington,
DC 20090-0555.